Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 12-11-2012, 9:55 PM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,286
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

This whole thing is awesome and gives me hope. I love Gura's notice of supplemental authority. I have a feeling this whole situation is now in its endgame and will be resolved within 12 months, with a few months of enforcement actions after that here in California before the LTCs start flowing.

I wish I knew of a Brady Campaign discussion forum I could read now to see what they're saying. There's no mention of this on their blog, although they do crow about some other decisions.

What are they going to be left with 12 months from now?
__________________
NRA life member

Exposing Leftists
Zomblog
The future of California?
Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 12-11-2012, 9:56 PM
The Shadow's Avatar
The Shadow The Shadow is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,213
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...ealed-weapons/

Okay, cool. So Illinois will get concealed carry, and most likely will have "Shall Issue" before California. What does this mean for California ?
__________________
Speaking about the destruction of the United States. "I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we ourselves must be its author and finisher. As a nation of free men, we must live through all times, or die by suicide. Abraham Lincoln Speech at Edwardsville, IL, September 11, 1858

Godwin's law
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 12-11-2012, 10:02 PM
SilverBulletZ06 SilverBulletZ06 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 222
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

When Ill. goes "May Issue", sorry I do not even begin to think about "Shall Issue" since this ruling has so many scapegoats built into it, they will not be able to be overly burdensome or costly. It was pretty spelled out in the text regarding legitimate issues with Heller.

What Ill. will end up with is a NY/Cali-style issue system.
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 12-11-2012, 10:07 PM
The Shadow's Avatar
The Shadow The Shadow is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,213
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverBulletZ06 View Post
When Ill. goes "May Issue", sorry I do not even begin to think about "Shall Issue" since this ruling has so many scapegoats built into it, they will not be able to be overly burdensome or costly. It was pretty spelled out in the text regarding legitimate issues with Heller.

What Ill. will end up with is a NY/Cali-style issue system.
So you're saying that their form of CCW will be LA, SF, OC, SD style CCW, which means no one will get a CCW.
__________________
Speaking about the destruction of the United States. "I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we ourselves must be its author and finisher. As a nation of free men, we must live through all times, or die by suicide. Abraham Lincoln Speech at Edwardsville, IL, September 11, 1858

Godwin's law
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 12-11-2012, 10:09 PM
SilverBulletZ06 SilverBulletZ06 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 222
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Shadow View Post
So you're saying that their form of CCW will be LA, SF, OC, SD style CCW, which means no one will get a CCW.
In issuance, yes I believe so. Very few people will "qualify".

In regards to restrictions placed on CCW permits, probably more like NY: very few outside of federal buildings.
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 12-11-2012, 10:11 PM
bulgron bulgron is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Santa Clara County
Posts: 2,777
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverBulletZ06 View Post
When Ill. goes "May Issue", sorry I do not even begin to think about "Shall Issue" since this ruling has so many scapegoats built into it, they will not be able to be overly burdensome or costly. It was pretty spelled out in the text regarding legitimate issues with Heller.

What Ill. will end up with is a NY/Cali-style issue system.
You're ignoring the political situation in Ill, which is spelled out in the first few pages of this thread. There's a near-supermajority of pro-gunners in the Ill legislature. They're just short of being able to bypass the governor's veto on a shall-issue bill. With this decision, if they do nothing (and block all attempts to pass a bad CCW bill), they end up with constitutional carry. Chicago can't handle constitutional carry, so the anti's are forced to play ball.

I predict that they'll have a pretty good state-wide shall issue bill by summer. They might even be able to get rid of their FOID cards.

The only thing that can delay shall-issue CCW in Illinois is if the case goes en banc.
__________________


Proud to belong to the NRA Members' Council of Santa Clara County

Disclaimer: All opinions are entirely my own.
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 12-11-2012, 10:27 PM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,819
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverBulletZ06 View Post
When Ill. goes "May Issue", sorry I do not even begin to think about "Shall Issue" since this ruling has so many scapegoats built into it, they will not be able to be overly burdensome or costly. It was pretty spelled out in the text regarding legitimate issues with Heller.

What Ill. will end up with is a NY/Cali-style issue system.
What in the living hell are you talking about?

Todd Vandermyde who is the head lobbyist in IL for both NRA-ILA & ISRA stated that both this Legislature and the next Legislature, we have a majority for "shall-issue".

May-issue isn't even in the cards. We can hold out and just get FOID carry. Anti-gunners need to beg us for concessions, not the other way around.

-Gray
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 12-11-2012, 10:32 PM
SilverBulletZ06 SilverBulletZ06 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 222
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Peterson View Post
What in the living hell are you talking about?

Todd Vandermyde who is the head lobbyist in IL for both NRA-ILA & ISRA stated that both this Legislature and the next Legislature, we have a majority for "shall-issue".

May-issue isn't even in the cards. We can hold out and just get FOID carry. Anti-gunners need to beg us for concessions, not the other way around.

-Gray
Playing devils advocate until I read it in print. Sorry, way too many let downs recently.


Political hot-potato may work, until the press throws out the first bad-shoot and the laws are then written counter to what pro-carry folks may want. Best bet is to throw out a strong shall-issue law now, IMHO. Politics is a fickle game, you don't want laws open if you lose the majority.


In the end though, all the best to our friends in Ill.
Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 12-11-2012, 10:48 PM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,819
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverBulletZ06 View Post
Playing devils advocate until I read it in print. Sorry, way too many let downs recently.


Political hot-potato may work, until the press throws out the first bad-shoot and the laws are then written counter to what pro-carry folks may want. Best bet is to throw out a strong shall-issue law now, IMHO. Politics is a fickle game, you don't want laws open if you lose the majority.


In the end though, all the best to our friends in Ill.
I trust Todd Vandermyde to know how to count votes. There is no danger that Illinois will go may-issue. We have the baton.
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 12-11-2012, 10:59 PM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
No, I am not a Moderator!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,493
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Peterson View Post
I trust Todd Vandermyde to know how to count votes. There is no danger that Illinois will go may-issue. We have the baton.
This. This is something NRA-ILA is competent at.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
Reply With Quote
  #211  
Old 12-11-2012, 11:05 PM
kcbrown's Avatar
kcbrown kcbrown is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 7,720
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
Uhm, by citing Mas, he's saying that people need to know the 4 rules. That's pretty darn pro gun.
The actual citation was:

Quote:
See Massad Ayoob, “The Subtleties of Safe Firearms Handling,” Backwoods Home Magazine, Jan./Feb. 2007, p. 30; Debra L. Karch, Linda L. Dahlberg & Nimesh Patel, “Surveillance for Violent Deaths—National Violent Death Reporting System, 16 States, 2007,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, p. 11, www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/ss/ss5904.pdf (visited Oct. 29, 2012).

The latter citation is probably referring to this bit:

Quote:
Context of the Injury and Associated Circumstances

Overall, unintentional firearm injury deaths occurred more commonly while victims were playing with a gun (29.9%), hunting (24.7%), showing a gun to others (14.3%), or loading or unloading a gun (10.4%). The circumstances of injury included thinking that a gun was unloaded, unintentionally pulling the trigger, and experiencing a gun malfunction (26.0%, 19.5%, and 5.2%, respectively) (Table 23).

So you could easily be right about that (and yeah, that makes it quite pro-gun). However, that conclusion requires interpretation and/or inference, whereas the support for competence testing clearly does not. That won't be a problem in the event an appropriate case winds up getting Posner and Flaum on the panel. It could easily be a problem otherwise. I'm very uncomfortable with such things being left to the luck of the draw. Courts are adept enough at cherry picking and "interpreting" things to suit their agenda as it is (witness the amount of abuse of Heller at the hands of the various anti-gun courts). They don't need help in the form of a less-than-explicit statement in a key decision.
__________________
The Constitution is not "the Supreme Law of the Land, except in the face of contradicting law which has not yet been overturned by the courts". It is THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, PERIOD. Your oath to uphold the Constitution is a joke unless you refuse to enforce unadjudicated laws you believe are Unconstitutional.

The real world laughs at optimism. And here's why.

I hope I end up having to donate another $1000 to CGF... However, this $500 is one I hope to not have to donate...
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 12-11-2012, 11:09 PM
kcbrown's Avatar
kcbrown kcbrown is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 7,720
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Peterson View Post
May-issue isn't even in the cards. We can hold out and just get FOID carry. Anti-gunners need to beg us for concessions, not the other way around.
And I say we give them none. They've given us none for far too long. It's about time they feel some of the legislative pain they've been subjecting us to.
__________________
The Constitution is not "the Supreme Law of the Land, except in the face of contradicting law which has not yet been overturned by the courts". It is THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, PERIOD. Your oath to uphold the Constitution is a joke unless you refuse to enforce unadjudicated laws you believe are Unconstitutional.

The real world laughs at optimism. And here's why.

I hope I end up having to donate another $1000 to CGF... However, this $500 is one I hope to not have to donate...
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 12-11-2012, 11:16 PM
kcbrown's Avatar
kcbrown kcbrown is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 7,720
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apocalypsenerd View Post
KC is sounding pretty optimistic. Maybe the Mayan Calendar thing has some legitimacy.



Like I said, I've adjusted my outlook accordingly.

I am a realist, after all. Can't be failing to account for what happens in the real world...


The criticisms I have of the decision are more nits than anything else. The real value of this decision is strategic, and it is huge.
__________________
The Constitution is not "the Supreme Law of the Land, except in the face of contradicting law which has not yet been overturned by the courts". It is THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, PERIOD. Your oath to uphold the Constitution is a joke unless you refuse to enforce unadjudicated laws you believe are Unconstitutional.

The real world laughs at optimism. And here's why.

I hope I end up having to donate another $1000 to CGF... However, this $500 is one I hope to not have to donate...
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 12-11-2012, 11:21 PM
elSquid's Avatar
elSquid elSquid is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Left coast.
Posts: 8,280
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Peterson View Post
May-issue isn't even in the cards. We can hold out and just get FOID carry. Anti-gunners need to beg us for concessions, not the other way around.
And it should be mentioned, for CA residents who may be visiting Chicago next July...

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local...119493094.html



-- Michael
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 12-11-2012, 11:26 PM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
No, I am not a Moderator!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,493
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kcbrown View Post
That won't be a problem in the event an appropriate case winds up getting Posner and Flaum on the panel.
Or the three judges on the panel in Ezell. Wait, isn't that 5 of 10 active justices on the 7th Circuit?

Math, like Science - it works b--ches.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 12-11-2012, 11:27 PM
1JimMarch 1JimMarch is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,796
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Here's how it will go...gunnies to grabbers:

"You guys want at least training in place before 180 days are up? Fine. Please us! We want no more FOID. We want Chicago permanently out of the gun control biz (strong preemption). We want unlimited cutlery carry to go with our CCWs. We want full reciprocity with anything that even smells like another CCW permit. We want lock-boxes for our boomthings at any of the few places we'll let you disarm us. We want you all to do the Funky Chicken Dance in Daley Plaza. You think we're kidding? You're going to have to give us a LOT before we'll concede to training requirements and costs over $10. Because all we have to do is sit here, twiddle our thumbs and fart in your general direction and in 180 days we get constitutional carry and one hell of a party in downtown Chi-town baby. Leave your gangbanger friends behind if you know what's good for 'em."

THAT is where we're at here.
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 12-12-2012, 12:34 AM
stingray4540's Avatar
stingray4540 stingray4540 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Bay Area
Posts: 441
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Teehee. Giddy like a school girl.
__________________
Quote:
“Thoſe who would give up Essential Liberty to purchaſe a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” - An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania (1759)
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 12-12-2012, 2:19 AM
kcbrown's Avatar
kcbrown kcbrown is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 7,720
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
Or the three judges on the panel in Ezell.
Well, only 2 of the 3, anyway (I've no idea if Rovner would side with the Moore decision or not). So make that 4 out of 10 at a minimum.

With 5/10 on our side, the chance of getting a favorable ruling from at least 2 out of the 3 judges is 50% (no surprise there).

With 4/10 on our side, that drops to 33%.


Quote:
Math, like Science - it works b--ches.
Yep.
__________________
The Constitution is not "the Supreme Law of the Land, except in the face of contradicting law which has not yet been overturned by the courts". It is THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, PERIOD. Your oath to uphold the Constitution is a joke unless you refuse to enforce unadjudicated laws you believe are Unconstitutional.

The real world laughs at optimism. And here's why.

I hope I end up having to donate another $1000 to CGF... However, this $500 is one I hope to not have to donate...
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 12-12-2012, 4:07 AM
scarville's Avatar
scarville scarville is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Glendora, CA
Posts: 2,306
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elSquid View Post
I have this fantasy where officials clearly acting in bad faith and contrary to the court's published opinion wind up being held in contempt...
I have a fantasy where they get life at hard labor unless their obstructionism causes someone to die in which case they get the death penalty.
__________________
Politicians and criminals are moral twins separated only by legal fiction.
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 12-12-2012, 4:17 AM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 6,042
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1JimMarch View Post
Here's how it will go...gunnies to grabbers:

"You guys want at least training in place before 180 days are up? Fine. Please us! We want no more FOID. We want Chicago permanently out of the gun control biz (strong preemption). We want unlimited cutlery carry to go with our CCWs. We want full reciprocity with anything that even smells like another CCW permit. We want lock-boxes for our boomthings at any of the few places we'll let you disarm us. We want you all to do the Funky Chicken Dance in Daley Plaza. You think we're kidding? You're going to have to give us a LOT before we'll concede to training requirements and costs over $10. Because all we have to do is sit here, twiddle our thumbs and fart in your general direction and in 180 days we get constitutional carry and one hell of a party in downtown Chi-town baby. Leave your gangbanger friends behind if you know what's good for 'em."

THAT is where we're at here.
^^^This!^^^



Oh, and along with the general excellence of the thinking and prediction, you made me laugh out loud as well!
__________________
CGN's token life-long teetotaling vegetarian. Not qualified to give any legal opinion so pay attention at your own risk.
Reply With Quote
  #221  
Old 12-12-2012, 4:52 AM
CDFingers CDFingers is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chico, CA
Posts: 1,853
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

I like this most recent expansion of gun rights.

Now if CA could become "shall issue" we'd be further down the road.

CDFingers
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 12-12-2012, 5:36 AM
pointedstick's Avatar
pointedstick pointedstick is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 566
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1JimMarch View Post
Here's how it will go...gunnies to grabbers:

"You guys want at least training in place before 180 days are up? Fine. Please us! We want no more FOID. We want Chicago permanently out of the gun control biz (strong preemption). We want unlimited cutlery carry to go with our CCWs. We want full reciprocity with anything that even smells like another CCW permit. We want lock-boxes for our boomthings at any of the few places we'll let you disarm us. We want you all to do the Funky Chicken Dance in Daley Plaza. You think we're kidding? You're going to have to give us a LOT before we'll concede to training requirements and costs over $10. Because all we have to do is sit here, twiddle our thumbs and fart in your general direction and in 180 days we get constitutional carry and one hell of a party in downtown Chi-town baby. Leave your gangbanger friends behind if you know what's good for 'em."

THAT is where we're at here.

Yes. YES! Exactly this. Y'all need to understand what a good position this decision puts us in. Especially:

Quote:
We want lock-boxes for our boomthings at any of the few places we'll let you disarm us.
We could get IL to lead the way on neutering the Antis' politicized abuse of gun-free zones.

If we could get rid of the FOID, add pre-emption and reciprocity, and accede to shall-issue with modest training requirements, I daresay that IL could be one of the more gun-friendly places in the USA. Imagine that.
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 12-12-2012, 6:01 AM
mag360 mag360 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 5,021
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Whats wrong with vermont style? They have good cheddar too. :-D
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 12-12-2012, 6:10 AM
The Shadow's Avatar
The Shadow The Shadow is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,213
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Peterson View Post
What in the living hell are you talking about?

Todd Vandermyde who is the head lobbyist in IL for both NRA-ILA & ISRA stated that both this Legislature and the next Legislature, we have a majority for "shall-issue".

May-issue isn't even in the cards. We can hold out and just get FOID carry. Anti-gunners need to beg us for concessions, not the other way around.

-Gray
I just wish I would have bet people on this forum that Illinois would be "Shall Issue" before California. I was pretty sure this would happen.

So my next prediction is that California will be the last state in the Union to go "Shall Issue", regardless of what a few California Sheriffs have done so far.
__________________
Speaking about the destruction of the United States. "I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we ourselves must be its author and finisher. As a nation of free men, we must live through all times, or die by suicide. Abraham Lincoln Speech at Edwardsville, IL, September 11, 1858

Godwin's law
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 12-12-2012, 6:12 AM
cdtx2001's Avatar
cdtx2001 cdtx2001 is offline
Rebel Scum
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Over Here
Posts: 6,051
iTrader: 68 / 100%
Default

This is all good, but I won't be truly happy until the carry law means: Able to purchase gun legally = Allowed to carry gun concealed.
__________________
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side kid" -Han Solo

"A dull knife is as useless as the man who would dare carry it"
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 12-12-2012, 6:15 AM
pointedstick's Avatar
pointedstick pointedstick is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 566
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cdtx2001 View Post
This is all good, but I won't be truly happy until the carry law means: Able to purchase gun legally = Allowed to carry gun concealed.
Well, the list of states that fit your definition is growing all the time!
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 12-12-2012, 6:27 AM
HowardW56's Avatar
HowardW56 HowardW56 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Torrance
Posts: 5,862
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
This. This is something NRA-ILA is competent at.

-Gene

That is the NRA’s strength...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 12-12-2012, 6:31 AM
Regulus's Avatar
Regulus Regulus is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Tustin Ranch, CA
Posts: 1,162
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default Updated Map

Wasn't sure if I should go with Green (yet), so I played it safe.

Man that's gotta hurt the anti's.

Thanks to all who made this happen and congratulations to our Illinois brothers and sisters.




Last edited by Regulus; 12-12-2012 at 6:47 AM.. Reason: Thanks and congratulations.
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 12-12-2012, 6:37 AM
Al Norris Al Norris is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Idaho
Posts: 386
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kid Stanislaus View Post
The state (IL) waits the entire 180 days and then appeals. They'll drag their feet and invent a barrage of delaying tactics until BHO appoints his next closet Marxist to the SCOTUS and its game over.
Not going to happen.

IL has 90 days to appeal to SCOTUS. IIRC, they have 14 days to motion for an en banc hearing. The clock is running.

If they are going to stall, they will make the en banc motion, shortly. Since this is a matter of striking a State law (a serious matter, for the courts), I suspect they will be granted that motion.

Should the CA7 take up the case en banc, the panel's decision will be removed. I'm assuming that a new briefing schedule will be issued... That will take up another 6 months or so. Then we will wait for a decision from the CA7. Could be another year from now.

Then, should this decision affirm the panels original decision, IL could stall further by appealing to the SCOTUS. That's another year to year and a half wait... June of 2015.

All during this time, the Law will remain in effect, as a stay will be granted at each and every step of the way.

The above doesn't take into consideration Woollard, or at this juncture, Kachalsky (which could conceivably put the final nail in their coffin, before an en banc decision).

Then we should also consider the 3 cases currently at the 9th (yes, this decision will have an affect upon them - good or ill). Should I also mention the NJ case? How about Gray's case?

This is the watershed moment we have been waiting for.
__________________
Listings of the Current 2A Cases, over at the Firing Line.
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 12-12-2012, 6:39 AM
fizux's Avatar
fizux fizux is offline
Senior Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,541
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Regulus View Post
Wasn't sure if I should go with Green (yet), so I played it safe.

Man that's gotta hurt the anti's.



Nah, go with green -- as in the color of the involuntary donations made to SAF in response to silly Chicago ordinances to follow.
__________________
Nationwide Master List of Current 2A Cases, courtesy of Al Norris @ TFL.

Reloading Clubs: SF, East Bay

Case Status: Peña v. Cid (Handgun Roster). SF v. 44Mag (Mag Parts Kits). Bauer v. Harris (DROS Fees). Davis v. LA (CCW policy). Jackson v. SF (Ammo/Storage). Teixeira (FFL Zoning). First Unitarian v. NSA (Privacy). Silvester (Waiting Period). Schoepf (DROS Delay). Haynie (AW ban). SFVPOA v. SF (10+ mag possession ban). Bear in Public: Drake (3CA); Moore (7CA); Richards, Peruta, McKay (9CA).
Reply With Quote
  #231  
Old 12-12-2012, 6:53 AM
The Shadow's Avatar
The Shadow The Shadow is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,213
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

So this is the order in which I see the last seven hold out states becoming "Shall Issue".

1. Delaware

2. Rhode Island

3. Maryland

4. Massachusetts

5. New York

6. New Jersey

7. California

If anyone sees this different, chime in.
__________________
Speaking about the destruction of the United States. "I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we ourselves must be its author and finisher. As a nation of free men, we must live through all times, or die by suicide. Abraham Lincoln Speech at Edwardsville, IL, September 11, 1858

Godwin's law
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 12-12-2012, 6:55 AM
Mitch's Avatar
Mitch Mitch is offline
Mostly Harmless
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Costa Mesa
Posts: 4,244
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CCWFacts View Post
I wish I knew of a Brady Campaign discussion forum I could read now to see what they're saying.
The Gun Control & RKBA Group at Democratic Underground is a reasonable proxy.

http://upload.democraticunderground....=forum&id=1172

Here is a thread on yesterday's ruling: http://upload.democraticunderground.com/117291342

It's a weird place, though. If you spend more than a week there you notice it's the same people saying the same things again and again and again.
__________________

Last edited by Mitch; 12-12-2012 at 6:58 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 12-12-2012, 7:01 AM
fizux's Avatar
fizux fizux is offline
Senior Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,541
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Shadow View Post
So this is the order in which I see the last seven hold out states becoming "Shall Issue".

1. Delaware

2. Rhode Island

3. Maryland

4. Massachusetts

5. New York

6. New Jersey

7. California

If anyone sees this different, chime in.
I would swap 5 with 6, and add #8: D.C. (albeit not a state).
__________________
Nationwide Master List of Current 2A Cases, courtesy of Al Norris @ TFL.

Reloading Clubs: SF, East Bay

Case Status: Peña v. Cid (Handgun Roster). SF v. 44Mag (Mag Parts Kits). Bauer v. Harris (DROS Fees). Davis v. LA (CCW policy). Jackson v. SF (Ammo/Storage). Teixeira (FFL Zoning). First Unitarian v. NSA (Privacy). Silvester (Waiting Period). Schoepf (DROS Delay). Haynie (AW ban). SFVPOA v. SF (10+ mag possession ban). Bear in Public: Drake (3CA); Moore (7CA); Richards, Peruta, McKay (9CA).
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 12-12-2012, 7:10 AM
Apocalypsenerd's Avatar
Apocalypsenerd Apocalypsenerd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oceanside, CA
Posts: 918
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kcbrown View Post



Like I said, I've adjusted my outlook accordingly.

I am a realist, after all. Can't be failing to account for what happens in the real world...


The criticisms I have of the decision are more nits than anything else. The real value of this decision is strategic, and it is huge.
Normally I'm a realist as well. I value your input because you're a realist and know a lot more than I do. When I read something like this, I just wait for the other shoe to drop. My guess would be an En Banc hearing that delays this out another couple of years. However, with the optimism being generated by just about everyone including you, I think my skepticism may be unwarranted.
__________________
Let me handle your property needs and I will donate 10% of the brokerage total commission to CG.
Buy or sell a home.
Property management including vacation rentals.
We can help with loans and refi's. 10% of all commissions will be donated to CG.

Serving the greater San Diego area.

Aaron Ross - BRE #01865640
CA Broker
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 12-12-2012, 7:13 AM
Python2's Avatar
Python2 Python2 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 906
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fizux View Post
I would swap 5 with 6, and add #8: D.C. (albeit not a state).
How about Hawaii?
__________________
Pinoy Bwana
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 12-12-2012, 7:30 AM
M. D. Van Norman's Avatar
M. D. Van Norman M. D. Van Norman is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California refugee
Posts: 4,163
iTrader: 19 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Regulus View Post
Wasn’t sure if I should go with Green (yet) …
As Al Norris pointed out, it’s still too soon for a color change. It could be only 179 days (2013) or as long as 900+ days (2015).
__________________
Matthew D. Van Norman
Dancing Giant Sales | Licensed Firearms Dealer | Rainier, WA
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 12-12-2012, 7:37 AM
RKV's Avatar
RKV RKV is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Santa Barbara County
Posts: 220
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default "If" they are going to stall

This is Chicago/Il. folks. EXPECT a stall, expect en banc. Look at Ezell for a model - this is the same players. And the stay will continue in the meantime. See you at SCOTUS in 2015. I wish I were wrong, but the history says that's how this will play out. Great reading in the decision, and hopefully persuasive to the supes. Pray for the health of the Heller 5.
__________________
I am or have been a) a member of the board of directors of a gun club b) NRA certified rangemaster c) been a fund raiser for NRA foundation d) life member of SAF and e) trained several hundred new college age shooters here in the PRK. If you think that posting a bagillion times here on this board makes you special you are part of the problem in this state - put down the [expletive] keyboard and try doing something positive in the real world for a change you Fudd.
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 12-12-2012, 7:47 AM
fizux's Avatar
fizux fizux is offline
Senior Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,541
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Python2 View Post
How about Hawaii?
Probably between MD and MA.
__________________
Nationwide Master List of Current 2A Cases, courtesy of Al Norris @ TFL.

Reloading Clubs: SF, East Bay

Case Status: Peña v. Cid (Handgun Roster). SF v. 44Mag (Mag Parts Kits). Bauer v. Harris (DROS Fees). Davis v. LA (CCW policy). Jackson v. SF (Ammo/Storage). Teixeira (FFL Zoning). First Unitarian v. NSA (Privacy). Silvester (Waiting Period). Schoepf (DROS Delay). Haynie (AW ban). SFVPOA v. SF (10+ mag possession ban). Bear in Public: Drake (3CA); Moore (7CA); Richards, Peruta, McKay (9CA).
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 12-12-2012, 7:53 AM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 6,042
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RKV View Post
This is Chicago/Il. folks. EXPECT a stall, expect en banc. Look at Ezell for a model - this is the same players. And the stay will continue in the meantime. See you at SCOTUS in 2015. I wish I were wrong, but the history says that's how this will play out. Great reading in the decision, and hopefully persuasive to the supes. Pray for the health of the Heller 5.
I'm not so sure you can look to Ezell for the model.

But if you do. . .

Remember that Chicago lost Ezell at CA-7? I don't recall their asking for en banc or asking for cert? Maybe I'm not remembering correctly?
__________________
CGN's token life-long teetotaling vegetarian. Not qualified to give any legal opinion so pay attention at your own risk.
Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 12-12-2012, 7:56 AM
Regulus's Avatar
Regulus Regulus is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Tustin Ranch, CA
Posts: 1,162
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M. D. Van Norman View Post
As Al Norris pointed out, it’s still too soon for a color change. It could be only 179 days (2013) or as long as 900+ days (2015).
I've been following this thread and understand the uncertainty of the next 179 days (or more).

The map was symbolic and a poke at the anti's.

Last edited by Regulus; 12-12-2012 at 8:05 AM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:52 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.